search_photos

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden and discloses useful behavioral details including pagination fields and response_format options. It does not cover permissions, rate limits, or default search scope, but for a search tool it adds substantial context.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is front-loaded with purpose, then structured into Args and Returns. Every sentence earns its place, and there is no redundant or misleading text.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The tool has 5 parameters, no required parameters, and an output schema. The description fully documents parameter semantics and return fields, though it omits guidance on sibling-tool selection, leaving a minor gap.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate fully. It does so by explaining every parameter: query matching against title/caption/alt text, 1-based page, per_page range, article_id restriction, and response_format behavior.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific verb and resource: searching photos/images in the Local News Matters media library. It is clear what the tool does, but it does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools like get_article_photos or get_photo.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies usage through the article_id parameter and search semantics, but does not state when to prefer this tool over alternatives such as search_articles or get_article_photos. No explicit when-not guidance is provided.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.